What is the name in the logo in the top left? (hint it's something dot com):This question is a means of preventing automated form submissions by spambots.

Topic review - Calling all USS Hornet CV-8 fans

Author

Message

Vlad

Post subject:

Re: Calling all USS Hornet CV-8 fans

DavidP wrote:

weave them in a bit more so the 2 bombers on the stern are not overhanging so much.

They're all glued down already the planes sit on their tails not their landing gear, and they're light so they move at the slightest touch, so there was no realistic way to test-fit the arrangement. I just started at the back and followed the pictures as closely as I could, looking down the length of the ship to get the same point of view as the photographer on the bridge to judge the angles.

[quote="DavidP"]weave them in a bit more so the 2 bombers on the stern are not overhanging so much.[/quote]

They're all glued down already :( the planes sit on their tails not their landing gear, and they're light so they move at the slightest touch, so there was no realistic way to test-fit the arrangement. I just started at the back and followed the pictures as closely as I could, looking down the length of the ship to get the same point of view as the photographer on the bridge to judge the angles.

Posted: Thu Jun 06, 2019 10:49 am

DavidP

Post subject:

Re: Calling all USS Hornet CV-8 fans

weave them in a bit more so the 2 bombers on the stern are not overhanging so much.

weave them in a bit more so the 2 bombers on the stern are not overhanging so much.

Posted: Thu Jun 06, 2019 9:57 am

Vlad

Post subject:

Re: Calling all USS Hornet CV-8 fans

So this is as close as I could get the arrangement of the B-25s on my Trumpeter 1/700 Hornet. It's a bit messier than it looks in the photos, and I think the No.1 plane is still too far forward but I tried my best. What do you think?

So this is as close as I could get the arrangement of the B-25s on my Trumpeter 1/700 Hornet. It's a bit messier than it looks in the photos, and I think the No.1 plane is still too far forward but I tried my best. What do you think?

I know I have seen at least one color picture of the Hornet on commissioning day and it did have a blue deck. I think the markings were mid tone gray but it has been awhile since I saw to be 100% sure.

I know I have seen at least one color picture of the Hornet on commissioning day and it did have a blue deck. I think the markings were mid tone gray but it has been awhile since I saw to be 100% sure.

Posted: Sun Jun 02, 2019 9:14 am

Charybdis

Post subject:

Re: Calling all USS Hornet CV-8 fans

Quote:

The time of her commissioning she had no deck markings other than the stain.

An important question would be; are these chrome yellow lines on mahogany deck?

[quote]The time of her commissioning she had no deck markings other than the stain.[/quote]

Here's a picture of HORNET at commission and the markings can be clearly seen.[img]https://www.dropbox.com/s/lrnpydtqmpmtp83/Hornet%20Commission.jpg?dl=1[/img][url]https://www.dropbox.com/s/lrnpydtqmpmtp83/Hornet%20Commission.jpg?dl=0[/url]

An important question would be; are these chrome yellow lines on mahogany deck?

Posted: Sun Jun 02, 2019 7:54 am

Angeliccypher

Post subject:

Re: Calling all USS Hornet CV-8 fans

Charybdis wrote:

The decision to change from flight deck markings to deck blue, came around the time of her commission so she would have been prepared with FD markings as indicated by your photos. They were most certainly not "worn off" and were most likely painted over when she was repainted in MS 12 mod.

The unique FD markings of HORNET were only used for the Doolittle Raid. At Midway she can be seen with plain deck blue FD.

The time of her commissioning she had no deck markings other than the stain. The first statement is correct. The second paragraph is what was intended but they did not have time to sand down the painted stripes for the bombers and restrain the deck to 250N. The decision was made to simply paint of the stripes with 20B. Hence you can see in Midway launch photos the the strips were still there just not white.

[quote="Charybdis"]The decision to change from flight deck markings to deck blue, came around the time of her commission so she would have been prepared with FD markings as indicated by your photos. They were most certainly not "worn off" and were most likely painted over when she was repainted in MS 12 mod.

The unique FD markings of HORNET were only used for the Doolittle Raid. At Midway she can be seen with plain deck blue FD.[/quote]

The time of her commissioning she had no deck markings other than the stain. The first statement is correct. The second paragraph is what was intended but they did not have time to sand down the painted stripes for the bombers and restrain the deck to 250N. The decision was made to simply paint of the stripes with 20B. Hence you can see in Midway launch photos the the strips were still there just not white.

Posted: Sun Jun 02, 2019 7:45 am

Charybdis

Post subject:

Re: Calling all USS Hornet CV-8 fans

The decision to change from flight deck markings to deck blue, came around the time of her commission so she would have been prepared with FD markings as indicated by your photos. They were most certainly not "worn off" and were most likely painted over when she was repainted in MS 12 mod.

USS WASP CV-7 also had similar FD markings up to her refit in Dec/Jan '41/'42 when it was painted deck blue. In some photos it's possible to see the lines under the top coat.

The unique FD markings of HORNET were only used for the Doolittle Raid. At Midway she can be seen with plain deck blue FD.

The decision to change from flight deck markings to deck blue, came around the time of her commission so she would have been prepared with FD markings as indicated by your photos. They were most certainly not "worn off" and were most likely painted over when she was repainted in MS 12 mod.

USS WASP CV-7 also had similar FD markings up to her refit in Dec/Jan '41/'42 when it was painted deck blue. In some photos it's possible to see the lines under the top coat.

The unique FD markings of HORNET were only used for the Doolittle Raid. At Midway she can be seen with plain deck blue FD.

Posted: Sun Jun 02, 2019 4:57 am

Vlad

Post subject:

Re: Calling all USS Hornet CV-8 fans

Angeliccypher wrote:

There were no other flight deck markings for her. Once she was launched and they painted her MS12 Mod they stained her deck and that was it.

Just want to revisit this. Both the pictures below clearly show Hornet with a complete set of flight deck markings and in Measure 12. So I ask again, were these worn off or deliberately obliterated of the Doolittle raid, or would they be present alongside the "special" lines for the bombers?

[quote="Angeliccypher"]There were no other flight deck markings for her. Once she was launched and they painted her MS12 Mod they stained her deck and that was it. [/quote]

Just want to revisit this. Both the pictures below clearly show Hornet with a complete set of flight deck markings and in Measure 12. So I ask again, were these worn off or deliberately obliterated of the Doolittle raid, or would they be present alongside the "special" lines for the bombers?

There were no other flight deck markings for her. Once she was launched and they painted her MS12 Mod they stained her deck and that was it. The stripes were added for the Doolittle raid and painted over (not stained hence the shade difference I mentioned earlier) once she came back to Pearl before Midway. Which is also when they changed her radar if memory serves. They repainted the MS12 Mod on the hull after Midway (which is why parts of it changed) and added more AA.

The radar was changed after Midway, not before. The need only became obvious during the Midway action. It had been hoped that the higher power of the SC radar (compared to the two CXAM variants) would allow similar performance from a smaller (and lighter) antenna. But at Midway Enterprise, with her CXAM-1, was able to track both raids on Yorktown. Hornet, with her SC, could not track either. Therefore, Hornet replaced her SC with California's CXAM set, and relocated her SC to the after mast to act as a backup. Ultimately, the USN essentially combined the higher power of the SC with the antenna size of the CXAM-1 to create the later SK-1.

[quote="Angeliccypher"]There were no other flight deck markings for her. Once she was launched and they painted her MS12 Mod they stained her deck and that was it. The stripes were added for the Doolittle raid and painted over (not stained hence the shade difference I mentioned earlier) once she came back to Pearl before Midway. Which is also when they changed her radar if memory serves. They repainted the MS12 Mod on the hull after Midway (which is why parts of it changed) and added more AA.[/quote]The radar was changed [i]after[/i] Midway, not before. The need only became obvious during the Midway action. It had been hoped that the higher power of the SC radar (compared to the two CXAM variants) would allow similar performance from a smaller (and lighter) antenna. But at Midway Enterprise, with her CXAM-1, was able to track both raids on Yorktown. Hornet, with her SC, could not track either. Therefore, Hornet replaced her SC with California's CXAM set, and relocated her SC to the after mast to act as a backup. Ultimately, the USN essentially combined the higher power of the SC with the antenna size of the CXAM-1 to create the later SK-1.

Posted: Thu May 30, 2019 1:29 pm

Vlad

Post subject:

Re: Calling all USS Hornet CV-8 fans

Angeliccypher wrote:

There were no other flight deck markings for her. Once she was launched and they painted her MS12 Mod they stained her deck and that was it. The stripes were added for the Doolittle raid and painted over (not stained hence the shade difference I mentioned earlier) once she came back to Pearl before Midway. Which is also when they changed her radar if memory serves. They repainted the MS12 Mod on the hull after Midway (which is why parts of it changed) and added more AA.

Thanks. That makes me realise I think I put the wrong radar on.

[quote="Angeliccypher"]There were no other flight deck markings for her. Once she was launched and they painted her MS12 Mod they stained her deck and that was it. The stripes were added for the Doolittle raid and painted over (not stained hence the shade difference I mentioned earlier) once she came back to Pearl before Midway. Which is also when they changed her radar if memory serves. They repainted the MS12 Mod on the hull after Midway (which is why parts of it changed) and added more AA.[/quote]

Thanks. That makes me realise I think I put the wrong radar on.

Posted: Thu May 30, 2019 7:08 am

Angeliccypher

Post subject:

Re: Calling all USS Hornet CV-8 fans

There were no other flight deck markings for her. Once she was launched and they painted her MS12 Mod they stained her deck and that was it. The stripes were added for the Doolittle raid and painted over (not stained hence the shade difference I mentioned earlier) once she came back to Pearl before Midway. Which is also when they changed her radar if memory serves. They repainted the MS12 Mod on the hull after Midway (which is why parts of it changed) and added more AA.

There were no other flight deck markings for her. Once she was launched and they painted her MS12 Mod they stained her deck and that was it. The stripes were added for the Doolittle raid and painted over (not stained hence the shade difference I mentioned earlier) once she came back to Pearl before Midway. Which is also when they changed her radar if memory serves. They repainted the MS12 Mod on the hull after Midway (which is why parts of it changed) and added more AA.

Posted: Thu May 30, 2019 6:52 am

Vlad

Post subject:

Re: Calling all USS Hornet CV-8 fans

Did Hornet have all her regular flight deck markings removed for the Doolittle raid or was there something more than the two white guide lines for the bombers?

Did Hornet have all her regular flight deck markings removed for the Doolittle raid or was there something more than the two white guide lines for the bombers?

Posted: Thu May 30, 2019 2:11 am

JariL

Post subject:

Re: Calling all USS Hornet CV-8 fans

Doolittle certainly had his doubts. His comment to the assurance that the plane really can take off from the deck was “What is BS in Navy language?” When the planes took off the real challenge was that they had to start “downhill” when the ship bow went down the wave. From the cockpit it looked as if you would end up straight into water. When the bow lifted with the wave it sprung the plane about 30 m up into the air.

Doolittle certainly had his doubts. His comment to the assurance that the plane really can take off from the deck was “What is BS in Navy language?” When the planes took off the real challenge was that they had to start “downhill” when the ship bow went down the wave. From the cockpit it looked as if you would end up straight into water. When the bow lifted with the wave it sprung the plane about 30 m up into the air.

Posted: Thu May 16, 2019 7:17 am

John W.

Post subject:

Re: Calling all USS Hornet CV-8 fans

Vlad wrote:

Thanks again

I'm building the Trumpeter 1/700 Hornet. Is there an issue with the flight deck length on it? The hull shape forward is wonky but that's not relevant to the deck spot, I thought it was in scale at least.

One thing you said that just clicked for me, the bombers were not all warmed up at the same time? That means they wouldn't need clearance between the props of one and the rudder of the next, should be able to squeeze tighter. It will take me a little while to fully build all of them, but I might make that my priority for this project to be able to test the line-up!

Vlad -I am working in 1/350 so I can't comment on 1/700 kits. I know I found a number of errors in the 1/350 models - some easy to fix, some not. Flight deck length was one error on one kit, the position of the #3 elevator was wrong on another. The USN plans are both good and a curse since you have the best documentation for the overall ship, documentation that the model makers sometimes do not duplicate. And the bad news is that you have the correct plans that some model makers do not follow faithfully. . . .

Looking again at NH 53420 you can see that plane #3 is turning the props (looks like they are at slow speed from the prop blur) and #4 is now clear in front of him, so he is turning up his props with most everyone standing well clear. No other plane has its props turning - look carefully and you can see the prop blades stationary on all of them you can see. When the planes were spread out during the transit to the launch point it was possible to start the engines (which they did every day) to make sure all was in order. There are videos that show this.

One more thought on the prelaunch deck spot. In Doolittle's book ("I Could Never Again Be So Lucky") he says he and LT Miller, the Navy pilot who helped the Raiders learn short take offs, got into the cockpit of Doolittle's plane after it was spotted for launch the day before. Doolittle, looking toward the ship's bow, questioned whether there really was enough room to get airborne (in a B-25 that was loaded 10,000 Lbs over maximum design weight). Miller assured him there was enough room. This suggests, but doesn't prove, the #1 plane was spotted at or close to the actual launch point from the start, and that Doolittle was looking out his windshield with some misgivings. And plane #2 could have been parked to starboard in front of #3 to allow for the offset to port location of #1 positioned at the launch point.I'm thinking Doolittle was maybe remembering Eglin:

Attachment:

short takeoff 3.jpg [ 192.34 KiB | Viewed 158 times ]

Attachment:

bent b-25.jpg [ 32.71 KiB | Viewed 158 times ]

[quote="Vlad"]Thanks again :wave_1:

I'm building the Trumpeter 1/700 Hornet. Is there an issue with the flight deck length on it? The hull shape forward is wonky but that's not relevant to the deck spot, I thought it was in scale at least.

One thing you said that just clicked for me, the bombers were not all warmed up at the same time? That means they wouldn't need clearance between the props of one and the rudder of the next, should be able to squeeze tighter. It will take me a little while to fully build all of them, but I might make that my priority for this project to be able to test the line-up![/quote]

Vlad -I am working in 1/350 so I can't comment on 1/700 kits. I know I found a number of errors in the 1/350 models - some easy to fix, some not. Flight deck length was one error on one kit, the position of the #3 elevator was wrong on another. The USN plans are both good and a curse since you have the best documentation for the overall ship, documentation that the model makers sometimes do not duplicate. And the bad news is that you have the correct plans that some model makers do not follow faithfully. . . .

Looking again at NH 53420 you can see that plane #3 is turning the props (looks like they are at slow speed from the prop blur) and #4 is now clear in front of him, so he is turning up his props with most everyone standing well clear. No other plane has its props turning - look carefully and you can see the prop blades stationary on all of them you can see. When the planes were spread out during the transit to the launch point it was possible to start the engines (which they did every day) to make sure all was in order. There are videos that show this.

One more thought on the prelaunch deck spot. In Doolittle's book ("I Could Never Again Be So Lucky") he says he and LT Miller, the Navy pilot who helped the Raiders learn short take offs, got into the cockpit of Doolittle's plane after it was spotted for launch the day before. Doolittle, looking toward the ship's bow, questioned whether there really was enough room to get airborne (in a B-25 that was loaded 10,000 Lbs over maximum design weight). Miller assured him there was enough room. This suggests, but doesn't prove, the #1 plane was spotted at or close to the actual launch point from the start, and that Doolittle was looking out his windshield with some misgivings. And plane #2 could have been parked to starboard in front of #3 to allow for the offset to port location of #1 positioned at the launch point.I'm thinking Doolittle was maybe remembering Eglin:[attachment=1]short takeoff 3.jpg[/attachment]

[attachment=0]bent b-25.jpg[/attachment]

Posted: Wed May 15, 2019 9:38 am

Hornet2019

Post subject:

Re: Calling all USS Hornet CV-8 fans

Angeliccypher wrote:

Hornet2019 wrote:

I am looking to build her at the time of her loss at Santa Cruz. Thank you.

At that time the Doolittle stripes where present but had been painted over using 20B. So they looked like darker lines on the deck. Similar to the metal areas on the flight deck (elevators and the main seams). Keep in mind that 20B is supposed to be the same shade as 250N that the deck is painted in but in practice actually came out a bit darker. So simple “preshading” by painting the stripes and metal areas black then airbrushing over the top should work.

Also note that her Measure 12 Mod was touched up after Midway. The areas that changed are forward the the 5/1 through 5/4 gun galleries and aft the 5/5 through 5/8 galleries.

The two bow 20mms were replaced by another 1.1”. The gun tub is very different for that mount.

The 20mm gallery on the starboard side of the island had four additional guns added to it extending aft from the current four. The splinter shield was also extended.

The platforms that extend out of the hangar deck at the forward doors should also be removed.

If you care about her plane load out it was F4Fs, SBDs and TBFs.

I cannot remember the differences to her radar at that time.

At Angeliccypher:

Thanks for the much needed info....

My build will consist of a Tom's Resin Hull replacement, Trump flight deck, 3D printed Hornet Island and various components for the weapons, a/c, PE , etc. In my opinion this "kit-bash" is the best hope of getting an "accurate" Hornet for Santa Cruz.

Any differing opinions out there? I would love to hear other perspectives.

[quote="Angeliccypher"][quote="Hornet2019"]I am looking to build her at the time of her loss at Santa Cruz. Thank you.[/quote]

At that time the Doolittle stripes where present but had been painted over using 20B. So they looked like darker lines on the deck. Similar to the metal areas on the flight deck (elevators and the main seams). Keep in mind that 20B is supposed to be the same shade as 250N that the deck is painted in but in practice actually came out a bit darker. So simple “preshading” by painting the stripes and metal areas black then airbrushing over the top should work.

Also note that her Measure 12 Mod was touched up after Midway. The areas that changed are forward the the 5/1 through 5/4 gun galleries and aft the 5/5 through 5/8 galleries.

The two bow 20mms were replaced by another 1.1”. The gun tub is very different for that mount.

The 20mm gallery on the starboard side of the island had four additional guns added to it extending aft from the current four. The splinter shield was also extended.

The platforms that extend out of the hangar deck at the forward doors should also be removed.

If you care about her plane load out it was F4Fs, SBDs and TBFs.

I cannot remember the differences to her radar at that time.[/quote]At Angeliccypher:

Thanks for the much needed info....

My build will consist of a Tom's Resin Hull replacement, Trump flight deck, 3D printed Hornet Island and various components for the weapons, a/c, PE , etc. In my opinion this "kit-bash" is the best hope of getting an "accurate" Hornet for Santa Cruz.

Any differing opinions out there? I would love to hear other perspectives.

Posted: Wed May 15, 2019 7:29 am

Angeliccypher

Post subject:

Re: Calling all USS Hornet CV-8 fans

Hornet2019 wrote:

I am looking to build her at the time of her loss at Santa Cruz. Thank you.

At that time the Doolittle stripes where present but had been painted over using 20B. So they looked like darker lines on the deck. Similar to the metal areas on the flight deck (elevators and the main seams). Keep in mind that 20B is supposed to be the same shade as 250N that the deck is painted in but in practice actually came out a bit darker. So simple “preshading” by painting the stripes and metal areas black then airbrushing over the top should work.

Also note that her Measure 12 Mod was touched up after Midway. The areas that changed are forward the the 5/1 through 5/4 gun galleries and aft the 5/5 through 5/8 galleries.

The two bow 20mms were replaced by another 1.1”. The gun tub is very different for that mount.

The 20mm gallery on the starboard side of the island had four additional guns added to it extending aft from the current four. The splinter shield was also extended.

The platforms that extend out of the hangar deck at the forward doors should also be removed.

If you care about her plane load out it was F4Fs, SBDs and TBFs.

I cannot remember the differences to her radar at that time.

[quote="Hornet2019"]I am looking to build her at the time of her loss at Santa Cruz. Thank you.[/quote]

At that time the Doolittle stripes where present but had been painted over using 20B. So they looked like darker lines on the deck. Similar to the metal areas on the flight deck (elevators and the main seams). Keep in mind that 20B is supposed to be the same shade as 250N that the deck is painted in but in practice actually came out a bit darker. So simple “preshading” by painting the stripes and metal areas black then airbrushing over the top should work.

Also note that her Measure 12 Mod was touched up after Midway. The areas that changed are forward the the 5/1 through 5/4 gun galleries and aft the 5/5 through 5/8 galleries.

The two bow 20mms were replaced by another 1.1”. The gun tub is very different for that mount.

The 20mm gallery on the starboard side of the island had four additional guns added to it extending aft from the current four. The splinter shield was also extended.

The platforms that extend out of the hangar deck at the forward doors should also be removed.

nothing on deck but has her number on the hull below the front of the flight deck. http://www.navsource.org/archives/02/022317.jpg

Posted: Tue May 14, 2019 8:06 pm

Hornet2019

Post subject:

Re: Calling all USS Hornet CV-8 fans

Angeliccypher wrote:

When you say you are doing the model in this time frame, are you meaning the Doolittle raid, before the raid or after the raid?. It is different for all three. It was asked an answered previously but I can clarify if needed.

I am looking to build her at the time of her loss at Santa Cruz. Thank you.

[quote="Angeliccypher"]When you say you are doing the model in this time frame, are you meaning the Doolittle raid, before the raid or after the raid?. It is different for all three. It was asked an answered previously but I can clarify if needed.[/quote]

I am looking to build her at the time of her loss at Santa Cruz. Thank you.

Posted: Tue May 14, 2019 4:12 pm

Hornet2019

Post subject:

Re: Calling all USS Hornet CV-8 fans

Quote:

Did you scroll through the entire thread? I want to say the question about the deck markings was asked - and answered - previously.

There were no numbers on the deck on USN carriers prior to 1943. I believe the practice started when the Essex and Independence class started entering service.

I read a lot of the thread but honestly I work full time and don't have enough time to read through all 41 pages...is there a way to search the thread for this specific question? Thanks.

Also, concerning deck numbering, in photos I have seen of the USS Princeton in combat don't appear to show deck numbers during the time of her loss---anyone with different info (pics) I would love to hear from, as I am building her as well...thanks to everyone.

[quote]Did you scroll through the entire thread? I want to say the question about the deck markings was asked - and answered - previously.

There were no numbers on the deck on USN carriers prior to 1943. I believe the practice started when the Essex and Independence class started entering service.[/quote]

I read a lot of the thread but honestly I work full time and don't have enough time to read through all 41 pages...is there a way to search the thread for this specific question? Thanks.

Also, concerning deck numbering, in photos I have seen of the USS Princeton in combat don't appear to show deck numbers during the time of her loss---anyone with different info (pics) I would love to hear from, as I am building her as well...thanks to everyone.